NEWS
1998 NEWS STORIES
December
November
October
September
July/August
June
May
April
March
February
January
ARTICLES
LETTERS
ROAMIN' CATHOLIC
Contents © 1998
by Jim Holman.
All rights reserved.
NEWS
OCTOBER 1998
"[I]T IS A PROVOCATIVE ACTION that flies in the face of cherished beliefs held by most Americans." So wrote Jeff Dietrich in the August 1998 Catholic Agitator, the organ of the Los Angeles Catholic Worker community. The provocative action to which Dietrich, a member of the Catholic Worker community, refers is the July 14 distribution by the Worker of 100 free shopping carts to the homeless of Skid Row. These "street-legal" carts, wrote Dietrich, were a response to "the anger we felt at watching homeless people harassed and jailed for up to thirty days for the mere crime of possessing a shopping cart. Each cart comes with a written statement giving its recipient permission from the Catholic Worker to use the cart. Thus, no one can be arrested for possessing a stolen cart."
Dietrich writes that the Catholic Worker has been widely criticized for this action; while the police have accused them of abbetting criminal activity, others have charged that they are "trashing the city" and "degrading the homeless." Dietrich himself writes, "[n]othing symbolizes more graphically the desperation and degradation of homeless poverty than a shopping cart. To give a shopping cart to a homeless person is an act of complicity and co-dependency, if not outright criminal conspiracy. Rather than reforming the poor or mainstreaming the poor, we are confirming the status of their dead-end poverty."
Dietrich, however, charges that it is illusory to think the poor can still achieve the American dream. Eliminated aid programs, safety nets, and now welfare reform have closed the door on the poor's upward economic mobility. This further results, said Dietrich, in an increase in homelessness--an aesthetcially unpleasing and business-chilling phenomenon that the more affluent seek to ignore.
Thus, wrote Dietrich, the "real purpose of our free shoppping carts is not simply to help the poor or to keep them out of jail, though it is definitely that. The real purpose is actually to insure that the poor, with the emblem of their poverty and suffering, will not be entirely invisible to the community."
CHOOSE NOW, A NEW EDUCATIONAL GROUP that "promotes moral choices in medical care," conducted an August 28 statewide picket against abortionists affiliated with the notorious abortion provider, Edward Allred. Picketers targeted the abortionists' homes so that "their neighbors know just what they do for a living." The protests were organized by Colette and Tim Wilson of Inglewood because, as Tim Wilson wrote in the Choose Now press release,"these abortionists come into our neighborhoods to do their grisly work, then retreat to their communities and attempt to live anonymously."
In order to ensure that the planned protests would not violate any municipal ordinances, Choose Now sent letters to the city attorneys of each city in which Choose Now had planned to protest. In their letter to the city attorneys Choose Now cited a 1998 United States Supreme Court decision, Frisby v. Schultz, where the court held that as long as picketing did not make the target of the picket feel physically like a captive in his home, the protesters could not be "barred from the residential neighborhoods. They may enter such neighborhoods alone or in groups, even marching. They may go door to door to proselytize their views. They may distribute literature in this manner or though the mails. They may contact residents by telephone, short of harassment."
In addition to notifying the city attorneys of the planned protest, Choose Now also sent letters to the neighbors telling them the name and address of their abortionist neighbor. Some neighbors were shocked to learn that they had an abortionist living in their midst; others, such as Karl A. Keener of the law firm of Baker, Silberberg & Keener, sent a letter to Choose Now, threatening to sue them if they "ever darken my mailbox again" with their "trash hate mail."
Choose Now also sent letters to the targeted abortionists, asking them if they in fact still performed abortions, and if they were no longer performing abortions, to contact the group. Colette Wilson told the Mission that this was to "give the doctors a way out." She noted that none of the abortionists took that option.
Another response the Wilsons received was a letter addressed to them saying: "We are compiling a list of idiots who routinely harass doctors. Our research indicates that you meet this criteria (sic). If this is not correct, please contact the Pope. Otherwise you can stuff this letter up your sanctimonious ass!" The letter was signed, "Hatefully yours, Jim 2 Jimmy Swaggert & Jim Baker, Directors of 'Fornicators Anonymous.'"
The August 28 protest went off without incident.
THE SPIRIT OF THE SAGE COUNCIL, a California non-profit group, filed an appeal in the California Court of Appeals, Second District, on August 27. The appeal challenges Los Angeles Superior Court judge Robert H. O'Brien's June 5 ruling which denied the petition of Vera Rocha, chief of the Gabrieleno Indian tribe, to stop the construction of the Los Angeles Archdiocese's $165 million cathedral.Rocha and Spirit of the Sage maintain that the cathedral site is a Gabrieleno tribal burial site. Judge O'Brien had not issued an opinion citing his reasons for denying Rocha's petition, and Rocha's lawyer, Craig Sherman, stated: "The trial judge provided no comment or independent analysis why our original claims were denied. It was as if the judge was inviting an appeal to have the legal issues reviewed by a higher court. Being that there is no legal basis for the City and Redevelopment Agency to do what they have done, we welcome and understand the need to appeal this case. We are confident we will prevail."
The appeal addresses the issues of "Separation of Church and State,"saying that since it is "across from the Los Angeles County Supervisors Building, the parking lot [site of proposed cathedral] has been an important public amenity for the Central Government area of Los Angeles. Proper procedures were not followed in allowing the Archdiocese to build on this property." The appeal then states the decision to allow the archdiocese to build on this site was not in accord with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQUA).
ACCORDING TO THE SANTA BARBARA INDEPENDENT, the Reverend Virgil Cordano, a former pastor of Santa Barbara Mission, asked a group of American Indians "to forgive the Catholic Church for the abuses and injustices committed more than 200 years ago when Spain first peppered the state with missions to 'Christianize the Indians.'" The Indians were passing by the Mission on a 500-mile trek north to Sacramento from San Diego. Though the 50 member group stated that their march was a "walk of prayer," the group was agitated by Governor Wilson's signing of legislation that allows for individual tribes to run casinos. Some Indians opposed this legislation claiming that it is an "infringement on their sovereignty."
During the week of August 24, the Indian community had learned that Father Cordano would apologize to the Indians on the lawn of Mission Santa Barbara. On August 30, during the 10 a.m. Sunday Mass, Father Cordano and Robertjohn Knapp, the unofficial leader of the Indian marchers, held hands "before a shrine of burning sage."
According to the Independent, Father Cordano asked "for forgiveness and a common ground to unite them hereafter and Knapp accepted." Apparently this was not enough. Pilulaw Khus, from Morro Bay, told Father Cordano: "I was told you were going to apologize. I don't think I heard those words." To which Father Cordano replied: "I apologize." One member of the Chumash stated that she didn't feel the apology was sincere enough. Another member of the tribe said: "I recognize that his apology took a lot of courage... but I'll see the sincerity when we get our land back."
ARCHBISHOP REMBERT WEAKLAND of Milwaukee has refused to allow Catholic Radio Network into his archdiocese. [See our article on the network, "Doctrine 24 Hours a Day," in the May 1998 Mission.] Organized by Father Joseph Fessio of Ignatius Press, John Lynch, formerly of the Noble radio network, among others, and with Archbishop Charles Chaput of Denver as its episcopal moderator, Cathoic Radio Network will have a talk-radio format. The network is concluding the $57-million purchase of ten radio stations across the United States. The San Diego-based network has stations located in Chicago, Dallas-Fort Worth, Denver, Minneapolis, New York, Phoenix, Philadelphia and Kansas City, Missouri. Their station in Los Angeles is KPLS-AM (830).
Archbishop Weakland said he would not welcome the Catholic Radio Network into Brookfield, a suburb of Milwaukee. According to the August 28 National Catholic Reporter, Weakland said he thought it "amusing that they claim to be very orthodox, yet they begin by ignoring a local bishop. That's strange ecclesiology." The archbishop stated that he was "very skeptical" about the network because of its talk radio format which is "no way to search for the truth" since "nobody really takes responsibility for remarks." Weakland also expressed concern over those involved with the network, according to a Catholic World News report. "My feeling is we have enought divisions in the Church," said the prelate. "I find some of the people involved, especially Father Fessio, have been very divisive, and I just don't think we need that... Father Fessio... gives in far too much to bishop-bashing and has been very opposed to anything that the Conference of Bishops
is doing."
WHAT DOES FATHER JOSEPH FESSIO think of Weakland's criticisms? "There are legitimate concerns that Archbishop Weakland, as any ordinary, could and should have because the ordinary is responsible for Catholic teaching and preaching within his archdiocese or diocese," said Father Fessio in a September 5 telephone interview. "When a radio station comes and is nationally based and calls itself Catholic, then it's not directly under the archbishop's control and he has a legitimate concern about safeguarding the integrity of Catholic doctrine for his flock. This is one of the reasons that we have established a content committee as an integral part of the Catholic Radio Network. Archbishop Chaput of Denver is a member of the committee, and we believe that will assure that our programming will be authentically Catholic."
Fessio thinks that the charges made by Weakland that Fessio is a bishop-basher and an opponent of the U.S. bishops are innacurate. "I would like to know from him," said Fessio, "what distinction he would make between legitimate criticism of things which some bishops do, and bishop bashing. In cases where I've been critical of some bishops, other bishops have had the same criticism. And where I've been critical of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops, it has also been the case that the bishops themselves were in disagreement. In every case that I'm aware of, the Holy See has confirmed the position that I've taken. I admit to having criticisms of some things that some bishops have done, but I want to know why that should be called bishop-bashing, especially when Rome has had the same criticisms."
Had the Catholic Radio Network failed to consult Weakland about its plans? "We could not make any consultation in the beginning," said Fessio, "because we were bound by confidentiality during contract negotiations. As soon as we had a contract to purchase a network, we immediately contacted all the bishops in the dioceses where this network has stations and made it clear that we wanted to work with the bishops, that we were going to be Catholic, and that we would have a programming policy statement in which we would not permit criticism of those in authority in the Church. We are not going to get involved in inner-church controversies, but rather we are going to be a Catholic voice commenting on issues of interest to the general public. We intend to follow that policy which protects legitimate authority from undue criticism."
But since much of the programming will be in a talk radio format, how will they avoid callers who wish to criticize a particular bishop? "We would not express an opinion on personal activities of bishops," Fessio replied. "We might talk about policies, we might discuss documents, but we don't intend to focus on that. We don't intend the major part of our programming to be directed at inner-Church controversy. It's not on our agenda."
Fessio said Weakland's refusal to welcome the network will not keep it out of Milwaukee. The network, said Fessio "is basically a group of Catholic laymen; I'm the only priest that's been directly involved in it." Catholic laymen, he said, according to the Second Vatican Council, "have an obligation to sanctify the secular order, and that includes the media, and there are very strong statements in the Second Vatican Council on the media and social communications where laymen are encouraged to support and even buy radio stations. So this is a mandate that is from higher up than the Archbishop of Milwaukee and we intend to cover the country, if we can. We want to work with the bishops as best we can, but we can't work with them unless they talk to us, or at least treat us with some respect."
"I can't see why we wouldn't want to have a station in Milwaukee," said Fessio, "or any reason why anyone would want to prevent us from having one there once it's clear that what we are doing is consistent with the teachings of the Catholic Faith."
IN A JULY 25 UPDATE E-MAILED to its supporters, the Dr. Bruce Steir Defense Committee stated that the California Medical Association, along with the National Organization for Women, the National Abortion Federation and the California Abortion Rights Action League, supports dropping the murder charges against Dr. Bruce Steir. Steir, an abortionist, was charged in October 1997 for the murder of Sharon Hamptlon, who died a few hours after he aborted her 20-week-old baby in December 1996 at A Lady's Choice, a Moreno Valley abortion clinic. According to Dr. Eugene Albright, one of two physicians who reviewed medical records for the Medical Board of California's investigation, Steir showed "a conscious and willful disregard of a life-threatening condition" during the abortion procedure. Steir is also facing a wrongful death suit filed by Hamptlon's family. (See "A Conscious and Willful Disregard," December 1997, Mission.)
Hobart Swan, spokesman for the California Medical Association, said that, although the California Medical Association is not directly involved in Steir's criminal case, upon his and numerous other requests, it reviewed the Hamptlon case. Swan explained that, while Steir is not an association member, any physician can request that the Association review a case. Whether the Association grants the request depends on several factors. Why did the California Medical Association decide to review the Hamptlon case? "Organized medicine is concerned about the nascent trend toward the criminalization of the practice of medicine," Swan explained. When asked whether the Association had received other requests in the last five years for peer reviews of criminal cases, he cited one case.
According to the California Medical Assocation, the Hamptlon case was reviewed by a panel of three abortionists experienced in performing second- trimester abortions, including abortions of 20 weeks, who had no affiliation with Planned Parenthood. Swan said that maintaining the confidentiality of physicians involved in a CMA peer review is standard procedure, and that the three doctors are not speaking to the press. The panel published its conclusion in a report dated simply July 1998: "Based on the information reviewed by CMA experts and their collective experience and judgment, the conduct of Dr. Steir on December 13, 1996, as regarding Sharon Hamptlon, cannot be characterized as criminally negligent behavior, manslaughter or any kind of criminal act."
The panel's report does not address the cause of Hamptlon's death, because, Swan said, it was only charged with reviewing the facts of the criminal prosecution against Steir, and the degree to which his actions conformed to the standard of practice relevant to the facts of the case. The California Medical Association will have no further involvement in the Steir case, as far as Swan knew. The Association's position on abortion is that it is a decision between the woman and her physician. It opposes parental and spousal notification requirements, but does not recognize partial-birth abortion as a medical procedure.
The Steir Defense Committee's e-mail reported that on July 10, Riverside County Superior Court Judge Patrick Magers denied a motion to dismiss the murder charges against Dr. Steir. Nina Wilder is the law partner of Doron Weinberg, Steir's criminal attorney. Wilder explained that, due to the nature of the July 10 hearing, the judge could not accept new evidence; thus the California Medical Association report was not presented to the judge in the motion to dismiss. The report has been provided to the Riverside County district attorney's office. "As far as we know, they haven't followed up on it yet at all," Wilder commented, evincing some frustration.
AS BOTH CANDIDATES FOR GOVERNOR of California are Catholic, how do they stand on life issues? According to a July 28 Los Angeles Times report, Democrat Gray Davis "supports abortion rights" and favors the death penalty. Republican Dan Lungren, who touted his Catholic faith during last spring's primary, though an opponent of abortion on demand, yet thinks legislation should allow abortion in cases of rape, incest, and when the mother's life is endangered. Lungren, too, is a supporter of the death penalty.
THE WILL BE NO MARRIED PRIESTS for now in the Byzantine Catholic Church in the United States. As reported in the September Mission, Archbishop Judson Procyk of the Metropolitan Archdiocese of Pittsburgh (which includes the Eparchy of Van Nuys) on July 15, promulgated 59 statutes of particular law which included a statute restoring the ordination of married men, and the institution of Eucharistic ministers in Byzantine parishes. The laws were to go into effect on Septermber 1. On August 21, Archbishop Judson announded that the implementation of the new laws had been delayed at the request of the Vatican, according to a report in the September 2 Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. News of the new laws, which had been reviewed and received by Rome in July, had been prematurely released by a Byzantine Catholic diocesan newspaper, Horizons, in August. Distorted versions of the news began to appear on the Internet, some of which portrayed the metropolia's proposed ordination of married men as a rebellion against Rome, according to the Post-Gazette. "Everything is on hold right now," Reverend John Petro, rector of Saints Cyril and Methodius Byzantine Catholic Seminary in Pittsburgh told the Post-Gazette, "because somebody announced it prematurely, in a very exaggerated way, and it cause ripples in all kinds of places." The proposed ordination of married men was a response to Rome's encouragement of the Eastern Churches to recover their ancient traditions, among which is a married clergy.
According to Archbishop Judson's August 21 letter, as reported in the Post-Gazette, "[t]he Holy See has requested additonal time in order to evaluate, reveiw, and consider these statues. When further information with respect to the date of promulgation becomes available, it will be released from this chancery office."
THE UNITED STATES CATHOLIC BISHOPS have decided to acquiesce to instructions given by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to remove their 1995 imprimatur for the Psalter translated by the International Commission on English in the Liturgy, according to a report in the August 28 National Catholic Reporter. The issue had been discussed at their June 19 meeting in closed door session, where, according to NCR, the bishops decided to comply, even though canon law "made no provision for such a demand."
Though publicly little has been said, privately, says NCR there has been criticism of the Vatican's move. Some have accused Rome of micromanaging matters best left up to the U.S. bishops' conference. One prelate, speaking anonymously, told NCR that Rome's action is "all about their fear of women's ordination and the whole feminist agenda." Archbishop Daniel Pilarczyk of Philadelphia complained that in forcing the issue of the imprimatur Rome was abandoning the processes she set up for the approval of liturgical texts. Pilarczyk had served as liason for the U.S. bishops to the Internatinal Commission on English in the Liturgy when the Psalter was approved.
Since 1995, the Psalter has been widely used in English speaking countries for common prayer, even though it was approved only for "study," not "liturgical use." The Psalter's publisher, Liturgy Training Publications in Chicago, has sold about 15,000 to 20,000 copies of the Psalter, along with 30,000 copies of a daily prayer version.
The Psalter, according to NCR, uses "'inclusive language' principles, such as avoiding masculine pronouns for God." Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, said there is in the Psalter "an unacceptable manipulation of the texts of sacred scripture."
THE COMMITTEE ON MARRIAGE AND THE FAMILY of the United States bishops has reissued Always Our Children, a pastoral message addressed to parents of homosexual children, which stirred much controversy when it was first issued last October 1. According to Catholic News Service, the bishops reissued the pastoral, July 2, after making several revisions that were approved by the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. The modifications of the text were in the form of three substitutions, one deletion, one addition in the text, and two additions as footnotes.
Where the original text called sexual orientation "a fundamental dimension of one's personality," the revised text now calls it a "deep seated dimension..." A second substitution occurs in the section discussing how parents can seek "appropriate help" for their children and themselves. Where the first text indicated that "isolated acts do not make someone homosexual," and counseled that "sometimes the best approach may be a 'wait and see' attitude, while you maintain a trusting relationship and provide various kinds of support, information, and encouragement," the revised text reads, as follows: "What is called for on the part of parents is an approach which does not presume that your child has developed a homosexual orientation and which will help you maintain a loving relationship, while you provide support, information, encouragement and moral guidance. Parents must always be vigilant about their children's behavior and exercise responsible interventions when necessary."
Another change occurs in the form of a footnote. Where the original text stated that a homosexual orientation cannot by itself be "considered sinful," a footnote quotes the Catechism of the Catholic Church: "This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most a trial."
The revised letter deletes a passage, a quote from the Catechism, which states that "[e]veryone... should acknowledge and accept his sexual identity," because of the danger that "sexual identity" could be misconstrued as "sexual orientation." The revised letter adds a paragraph, drawn from the The Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons, the Holy See's doctrinal congregation's 1986 letter, that says as homosexuals "dedicate their lives to understanding the nature of God's personal call to them, they will be able to celebrate the sacrament of penance more faithfully and receive the Lord's grace so freely offered there in order to convert their lives more fully to his way."
Another modification occurs in a footnote to the passage that reads that "[n]othing in the Bible or in Catholic teaching can be used to justify prejudicial or discriminatory attitudes and behaviors" towards homosexuals. The footnote reads: "In matters where sexual orientation has a clear relevance, the common good does justify its being taken into account, as noted by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in 'Some Considerations Concerning the Response to Legislative Proposals on the Nondiscrimination of Homosexual Persons,' 1992, No. 11."
Finally, the revised pastoral shortens a passage in the original, which counsels Catholics to "[u]se the words 'homosexual,' 'gay,' 'lesbian' in honest and accurate ways, especially from the pulpit. In various and subtle ways you can give people 'permission' to talk about homosexual issues among themselves and let them know that you're also willing to talk with them." The passage revised reads: "When speaking publicly, use the words 'homosexual,' 'gay' and 'lesbian' in honest and accurate ways."